Julian Assange, WikiJournalist

Is the Wikileaks "editor-in-chief" a journalist or an activist? Or both?

Ambling up to the stage in a rumpled suit and clutching a laptop covered in bumper stickers, Julian Assange didn’t appear particularly dangerous, like a man soon to be accused by the United States government of having “blood on his hands.” He looked like Edgar Winter as imagined by Jim Henson; an awkward, lanky Australian with translucent skin and wisps of white hair falling over his face. Assange, as you surely know by now, is the founder and “editor-in-chief” of Wikileaks, the website responsible for the recent release of thousands of classified U.S. military documents detailing the war in Afghanistan.

In the company of those who survived the Khmer Rouge's killing fields, the torture chambers of Iran, Soviet psychiatric hospitals, and a man who avoided being hacked to death during the Rwandan genocide by hiding under a pile of corpses, Assange asked attendees of the 2010 Oslo Freedom Forum to remember the “statement that was put by the Nazis on front of concentration camps that ‘work brings freedom,’ an idea that Himmler had when he himself was in prison.” Himmler did not invent the phrase Arbeit Macht Frei nor had he been imprisoned until the end of the war. It wasn’t a promising start to a Nazi analogy. But Assange barrelled ahead, breathlessly explaining that the Guantanamo prison camp had a similar slogan (“Honor Bound to Defend Freedom”), one that, as a perversion of truth, is “worse than ‘work brings freedom.’”

It was to this speech, and this wildly overblown comparison, that my mind wandered when watching Assange’s seemingly endless media tour to promote Wikileaks Afghanistan document dump. The mild, sallow-faced whistleblower who routinely dismissed corporate media propagandists was now to be found on NBC News, telling Andrea Mitchell that the release of the Afghanistan documents was like the opening of the Stasi archives. Assange, it seemed, was something of a specialist in the obscene, historically illiterate analogy. But trawl through the fetid swamps of the blogosphere and you will find countless paeans to this paragon of New New Journalism, a man whose name is frequently preceded by the adjectives “brave” and “heroic.”

It’s up to specialists in military affairs and those with a deep understanding of Afghanistan to determine if these documents will ultimately add to our understanding of the war or, as has been frequently argued, if such raw intelligence data simply add detail—some extraneous, some misleading, some valuable—to what we already knew. While it seems implausible that in 91,000 pages of secret documents there is nothing unknown, it is more likely that there is simply nothing explosive here. As New York Times editor Bill Keller told CNN, his reporters dug out plenty of interesting material but the cache wasn’t "full of scandals or revelations."

Keller, who received the documents from Assange before they were published online, bristles at the suggestion that Assange is a journalist and that Wikileaks was, as the organization has repeatedly claimed, a “media partner” of the Times. Wikileaks, says Keller, was simply a source, no different than the countless other sources the newspaper works with. And unlike the Times, "they are an advocacy organization. They have a point of view, and an ideology..."

If Assange wants to be a journalist—and he consistently identifies himself as one—he would be advised to cease referring to Wikileaks as an “activist organization” attempting to make a “political impact” and “achieve justice.” As Washington Times national security correspondent Eli Lake told me, Assange is “an activist who understands computer code,” not a journalist. (Incidentally, Lake describes himself as generally “pro-leak” and complains that Assange “will now be the poster boy for everyone who wants to create an official secrets act in the United States.”)

After Keller’s criticism, Assange moaned that The New York Times, a newspaper with an impressive and brave staff of war correspondents, wouldn’t link to the Wikileaks website and denounced the paper’s coverage of the leak as “unprofessional.” The Times of London, whose staff reported that Wikileaks' document dump exposed the names of confidential Afghan informants, was “disingenuous” in their reporting, the paper guilty of “media manipulation.” The rest of the media, many of whom are currently translating the leaked material into news stories, is doing “such a bad job” compared to Wikileaks. Those who criticize Wikileaks' methodology—and they span the ideological spectrum—"feel jealous, or they just don't understand the issue," Assange says.

When attacked for exposing the names of Afghan informants, and potentially exposing them to Taliban retribution, Assange lapsed into incoherence, citing the hitherto unknown “journalists shouldn’t prognosticate” rule: “In journalism we should actually ignore people that say something might happen or could happen.” It’s a rule that would frequently require that we ignore Julian Assange.

But Taliban leaders recently declared that they were reviewing the documents, looking for traitors to punish (i.e. behead). Assange dismissed the claim, reasoning, "Anything in theory has the potential to harm anything else." But if this fails to convince, Assange blamed Wikileaks' exposure of Afghan informants on the United States military, claiming to be “appalled that the US military was so lackadaisical with its Afghan sources. Just appalled.” When asked by Today Show host Meredith Vieira if the deaths of informants could be considered “collateral damage” in his attempt to stop the war in Afghanistan, Assange agreed.

But rather than accept this sinister moral calculus, why can’t Assange and Wikileaks understand that one can leak documents that expose and enlighten while also protecting those in need of protection? Collating and interpreting 91,000 documents is a difficult task, precisely because this type of journalism is difficult. Assange, though, is learning the craft of journalism on the fly—charming when covering town meetings in Buffalo, dangerous when exposing Afghans to Taliban justice.

Suffering through every stop on his media tour, it becomes apparent that his transition from hacker to crusading journalist is not yet complete. Assange says that the Afghanistan documents are important because they contain "raw facts" (they contain, in fact, raw data) before they are massaged by the government and media. In another interview he advises that we "have to be careful reading this material" because of the inherent military bias contained in military reports. When asked if the material provides evidence of war crimes, Assange hedges, saying that the leaked "reports can be quite terse so I wouldn’t want to prejudge the issue and say for sure that a war crime has been committed.” But to ABC News, "it's pretty clear that at least some of these are war crimes."

Assange is right that readers must be extremely circumspect when consuming Army spin, even if it’s designed for internal use only. But should we be circumspect about Wikileaks' spin on released documents? Take Assange’s claim, repeated in dozens of interviews, that Wikileaks obtained a 32-page document outlining a U.S. intelligence plan to “destroy Wikileaks.” But the document, available here, says nothing of the sort; it’s merely a sleep-inducing intelligence assessment on what Wikileaks means to U.S. Army security. The quotes pulled by Assange that “prove” a conspiracy are clumsily and dishonestly wrenched from context and detail not a “plan to destroy” Wikileaks, but tactics on how the military can discourage leaking.

Looking at Assange’s previous forays into journalism—where he authored stories and attempted to interpret data for the Wikileaks site—I stumbled upon this 2007 story about the archives of the East German secret police (Stasi), in which the WikiJournalist provides the wrong date for the country’s collapse and, misreading a BBC news report, erroneously states that the CIA was prevented from “looting” the Stasi building of files by German “civil rights activists.” (The cache of Stasi documents were obtained by Langley in 1992, when the agency allegedly paid $1.5 million to a former Stasi general. In other words, a paid leak.) And while we are being pedantic, most journalists should be aware that “newspaper” is one word.

The problem is not just that Assange posted 91,000 documents online having, by his own admission, read only 2,000 of them carefully. Nor is the problem the reckless exposure of brave Afghans who would rather not live under the jurisdiction of a fanatical religious cult. The real lesson for the Wikileaks team is that while obtaining secret documents is an integral part of journalism, it is not by itself journalism. And contrary to Assange’s grandiloquent proclamations that he intends to “build a historical record, an intellectual record, of how civilization actually works in practice,” in its four years of existence he has produced a handful of interesting and impressive scoops, but the dreaded “mainstream media” has done far more.

So by all means, Julian, stump for more openness, publish more leaks, continue your attempts to “achieve justice.” But stop calling yourself a journalist.

Michael C. Moynihan is a senior editor of Reason magazine

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Invisible Finger||

    OT:

    Tax dollars HARD at work.

    http://www.chicagobreakingnews.....erage.html

  • Paul||

    Is the Wikileaks "editor-in-chief" a journalist or an activist? Or both?

    As long as he continues to tell the truth, both.

  • Paul||

    The quotes pulled by Assange that “prove” a conspiracy are clumsily and dishonestly wrenched from context and detail not a “plan to destroy” Wikileaks, but tactics on how the military can discourage leaking.

    One could say that if the Army does successfuly plug its leaks, WikiLeaks would be...destroyed.

  • .||

    Hey, one could also say it's just..."collateral damage."

  • ||

    One could also say that if I successfully defend my home against an invader, I have destroyed their ability to rob me.

  • ||

    rubbish

  • JohnD||

    a bullet in the brain would achive the desired result. We have people in our government that are trained to do that sort of thing.

    No big loss if it did happen.

  • ||

    but capn, the rats are jumping overboard after they ate the last cork.

  • ||

    What rats?!?!?

  • KenK||

    If he was willing to put some Taliban or Al Queda secrets on his site he wouldn't be such a hypocrite.

    He won't though, too afraid of a death fatwa.

    He probably won't mess with the Russians or the Chinese either.

    But in the Age of Obama he has nothing to fear from the USA.

  • ||

    nonsense

  • Kolohe||

    If he was willing to put some Taliban or Al Queda secrets on his site he wouldn't be such a hypocrite.

    To be fair, there aren't many Taliban/Al Queda secrets - "Death to the Invaders & Infidels" is their fairly public (and refreshingly simple) strategic vision and their IED manufacturing processes are open-source.

  • ||

    How about the plans on where they are going to plant the bombs, where's the next suicide bomb going to blow up, communication channels with al Quaeda, location of bin Laden...

  • ||

    the taliban use camel dung smoke signals

  • ||

    That is ignorant. They are as sophisticated as any enemy our military has ever faced. They are probably the most adaptable enemy our military has ever faced.

  • ||

    that was an attempt at humor

  • ||

    Assange would need to leek more recent CIA Mossad emails in order to tell us where the next 7/7 will occur.

  • Waterhouse||

    They HAVE put up secrets from China and Russia. They also put up secrets from an al-Qaeda linked Islamic group in Somalia, talking about assassinating members of the fragile government there. The only reason Wikileaks is so America-focused right now is because they had a sudden influx of extraordinary leaks from Bradley Manning. They post leaks from everywhere.

    Incidentally, the Afghan War Diary suggests a number of connections between the Taliban and Pakistani intelligence. Don't those count as Taliban secrets?

  • ||

    No because that was never a secret.

  • Giordano Bruno sez hi||

    +1

  • ||

    what about the isi cia bin laden connect?

    how well is that kno0wn?

  • ||

    Uh pretty well known. The ISI and the CIA worked together to supply and train Bin Laden's Mujahideen during the Soviet war. You, sir, are an idiot.

  • ||

    o i mean AFTER that good sir.

  • ||

    You may be talking about how Bob Grenier spoke with Mullah Beradar right after 9/11. In that conversation he almost had Beradar agree to disavow Mullah Omar and turn over Bin Laden. Beradar was almost ready to go. What a different world we would have today. I will let you look up who Bob Grenier is. I will let you fill us in on what crack pot conspiracy theory you are espousing.

  • ||

    so why don't you tell us about bin laden's magical escape from tora bora as he schlepped his dialysis machine over the khyber pass?

  • ||

    Actually I will tell you about that. As US forces pursued him and his senior leadership they realized what route he was going to take. The US made a deal with Pakistani and local militias to pick these guys up or at least stall them. Something went wrong and they made it through. Careful who you trust I suppose.

  • mad libertarian guy||

    Knowing something and having tangible proof are two very separate ideas. What we know can be denied. When we have proof, it changes the game in our favor (as voters who should have good information so that we might have a chance at putting the right people in the right places when making war policy).

  • ||

    There is no such thing as "proof" anymore. There is always a reason to trust the validity of any piece of information. The only thing people can do is look at the preponderance of evidence and likely scenarios. It takes a little bit of analysis these days using reason and logic. But in a world where people esposes ideas and positions that are completely divorced of reason, logic, and objectivity it is very dificult.

  • ||

    if i pour molten iron in your ear, isn't that a geometric proof that you're not gonna be happy in one shake of the salt?

  • Federal Dog||

    "Is the Wikileaks "editor-in-chief" a journalist or an activist? Or both?"

    Neither: He's a two-bit profiteer. Nothing but a filthy capitalist keen to profit from other people's deaths.

  • ||

    Actually, the term you are searching for is "traitor". And any media outlet that published this list is an accessory.

  • Rizzle||

    'Traitor' to whom, exactly? Assange isn't American...

  • ||

    Thank god he isn't an American

  • ||

    Thank god he isn't an American

  • ||

    and you can say that again

  • ||

    assange is a traitor to the cause that says greed is good.

  • Giordano Bruno sez hi||

    If I hear one more American call a non-American a "traitor", as if America had dominion over the world, I'm gonna use my fortune to build a combination Mosque/Strip Club/Gay Wedding Chapel *directly* next to The Pit at Ground Zero.

  • Leroy||

    Traitor

  • Lord Ballsac||

    I'll chip in 5 bucks.

  • ||

    Don't worry. Fucktard americans don't know that there are other countries out there. They believe the world's population is composed of either americans or martians.

  • ||

    got proof?

    didn't think so

  • ||

    Laughable! "a filthy capitalist keen to profit from other people's deaths..." well aside from the fact that I take exception to such a use of the term "capitalist", I would say that description far more accurately fits the warmongers that Assange is exposing. I can't believe people still insist on calling Assange a murderer, death-profiteer, etc etc when what he is EXPOSING is the corruption of multiple countries engaged in decades-long conflicts over oil, minerals, drugs, and power with death counts in the millions. Talk about brainwashed.

  • ||

    I think he is a pretty cool dude.

    Lou
    www.web-privacy.at.tc

  • JohnD||

    That would mke you a first class MORON.

  • ||

    So is the Assange a journalist or an activist, writes Senior Editor Michael C. Moynihan. Or both?

    Can't he be both and a Bond villain?

  • ||

    Only if he has sharks with frikkin' laser beams on their heads.

  • ||

    The hairdo alone is villainous.

  • Zach Mayfield||

    Reminds me of the bad guy from Die Hard

  • ||

    the man is MORAL intelligent and dedicated.

    david vs golitath

  • .||

    Oh yeah, just like Ayers and Dohrn.

  • ||

    Exposing, to a group of pathologically murderous thugs, the names, locations, and families of people who trusted the US with their lives is now a moral act?

  • Government of Wolves||

    Agreed. +100

    Assange is repulsive for that act alone. Leave aside what you think about the war, exposing Afghans who as Moynihan said "would rather not live under the jurisdiction of a fanatical religious cult" isn't just reckless, it's downright evil. How he can dehumanise Afghans like that to serve his petty crusader mentality is beyond me.

  • ||

    you sound scared for your own nasty actions

  • ||

    there are many people worldwide who believe that the most dangerous pathological thugs are in the pentagon.

  • wtf||

    Who the fuck is "golitath"?

  • ||

    george

  • ||

    Idiot

  • JohnD||

    You have a strange (distorted) sense of what is moral.

  • ||

    you know me, right?

  • Paul||

    When asked by Today Show host Meredith Vieira if the deaths of informants could be considered “collateral damage” in his attempt to stop the war in Afghanistan, Assange agreed.

    Wooooo, snap.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    With a carefree, break-a-few-eggs attitude like that, he as the makings of a senior White House foreign policy advisor.

    I think Wikileaksleaks has grainy night vision footage of informants being offed.

  • ||

    let us know when you find evidence of one "informant" getting axed.

  • ||

    So if these people have to pack up their families, leave their home and go on the run for the rest of their lives, that's OK by you. It's only bad if one of them dies?

    Great.

  • ||

    let me know when you find an example of one person being harmed.

    meanwhile keep twisting in the wind.

  • marlok||

    Once these news stories start popping up, will you return to the message board and agree how freaking reckless it was for him to name afgans who worked with the US?
    No, probably not.

  • ||

    it's true that i am new to this board and will not likely return often. so far haven't seen much.

    it's possible that our goon squads will kill a few of these people and SCREAM SEE. that's how sick this vile imperial game has become.

    wikileaks is awesome.

  • marlok||

    It's nice that you already have a conspiracy theory planned for when one of these people gets beheaded.

    Why won't you concede that it was reckless to forget to redact the names of these afgans?

  • ||

    go deeper.

    anyone interested in julian assange, check this ted talk out.

    http://blog.ted.com/2010/07/19/why_the_world_n/

    every effort was made for harm minimalization. they withheld 15,000 files because of human concerns.

    do you doubt that the u.s. deliberately causes provocation with our assassin squads?

    do you doubt that the u.s. military propagandists commit character assassination daily and manipulate the media?

  • ||

    The fact that you found it is surprising. I imagine you apend most of your time commenting on the repeal of prohibition through prop 19on sites like indepentent politcal report.

  • ||

    You are also probably a truther who believes nanothermite charges brought down the WTC.

  • ||

    tell us about the pools of molten iron that burned for weeks beneath each tower.

  • ||

    Wow!

  • ||

    as i type this cannabis is de facto legal.

    prop 19 will win in cali and will signal the beginning of the end of the drug war.

    and we will blow pot smoke in your faces.

  • ||

    The one thing you and I will agree on. That doesn't make you any less of a reactionary idiot who will atch onto any counter-culture conspiracy theory you can find. Try to have an original thought every now and again.

  • ||

    the molten iron?

  • juris imprudent||

    You are a rare moron indeed if you don't understand that most people here are all about ending the war on rights... drugs, I mean the war on drugs.

    Then again, you appear to be susceptible to any stupid conspiracy plot you come across. Maybe you should look into Chemtrails.

  • ||

    yes we know some libertoonians oppose the drug war and hey good job at stoppin it.

    molten iron what about the molten iron (in your shorts)?

    and why was rummie hiding in his office?

    and did prez bushie really fly into harms way on that fateful morn?

  • ||

    Full on, 100% tinfoil hatted, moonbat truther WACKJOB!!!!!!!!!!!

  • ||

    But he may be onto something with this whole "molten iron" thing...hmmmm

  • ||

    how would you know?

  • ||

    I believe the Taliban already said they will kill them. I am betting that some of these informants are members of Taliban cells. All Mr. Taliban has do is read his buddies name and Bingo. He's got some beheadin to do. Wamsagongo you are being intellectually dishonest and purposely blind.

  • Awk||

    Where's the outrage over the thousands of civilians killed in our wars? Yet the possibility of an informant having to move to the next town is an atrocity? This is such a stupid argument. There are thousands of people already dead from 9 years of bombs. Wedding parties and brides included.

  • ||

    Apparently you have been living in a cave and haven't heard about the RoE. I am not going to spell it out again. The NATO forces are under strict orders to eep civilian casualties down as low as is humanely possible. What you really want to say is get out of the war. War has casualties ours theirs and innocent civilians. Definition of what an inncocent civilian is would be nice. Most of the groups in Afghanistan are proud of their 0 civilian score. Also don't believe the Hype. Stop listening to every talking head that says soldiers are indiscriminately killing civilians. Its actually quite rare. If you don't believe come to Afghanistan. You will soon learn that it isn't NATO people are afraid of.

  • ||

    so was that mohammed with two m's?

  • ||

    intellectually dishonest and purposely blind !!??

    how so?

  • ||

    You are intellectually dishonest because you clearly have not read any of the documents that have been leaked. I have read a few not all by a long shot. Many of the documents are interrogation reports and source reporting. There are also reports on civilian casualties. Do you know why they are in there? Because the NATO command has a response team that investigates these incidents. They use these reports to determine who they need to talk to along with Afghan government officials in order to develop an effective response to make as much right as they can. You also blindly follow whatever Julian Assange says and refuse to question him. He has lied on multiple occasions and doctored much of the footage that has been released. You could only be this blind through conscious thought.

  • ||

    there are no taliban cells.

    there's only bin laden on his dialysis machine.

  • ||

    You cannot actually believe what you are saying. If you do it is because you don't know any better. What do you call the group of Taliban that killed those two sailors recently. I suppose they aren't a cell maybe they are just a group instead. You are a grade A moron who has never stepped out side your comfort zone in California. Stop being so provincial and go outside and learn something with your own eyes for once. Pathetic.

  • ||

    insurgency aginst a foreign invader/usurper is what i would call it.

    as for all your other blather, blather on

  • ||

    Exactly what is NATO usurping? Is Afghanistan nw called the NATO Republic of Afghanistan? Is it suddenly the 51st state? I'm sure your response will be that the US is setting up a puppet government. Karzai's anit-US sentiment is pretty well known. The US wrks with him only because he was elected by the people of Afghanistan. They would have prefered Dr. Abdullah Abdullah. So tell me how calling a group of Taliban fighters a cell is in correct. As for Blather I think you need to review your posts. You have yet to argue anything on the merits. You enjoy posting nonsense and non sequiturs.

  • ||

    nato is a euphemism signifying nothing real but a media perception and a few unlucky boots on the ground.

  • ||

    I will agree with you on that one. However you have not addressed any of my arguments.

  • ||

    i don't know how the taliban operate, cell shmell that's your framing.

    the most important cohesive entity in this part of the world is the clan/theocracy model.

    somehow the taliban are affective insurgents whomever or whatever the construct.

    we can't win.

  • ||

    It is very clear that you are not familiar with how the Taliban operate. They are effective insurgents, but why are they effective. Tacticaly and strategically they don't stand a chance against the US. However the US has tied itself down with unrealistic goals and restrictions. If the US did not so hinder themselves the Taliban would NOT be effective.

  • ||

    you do NOT have superior tactics and strategy. more bombs yes

    their strategy and tactics - ON THEIR HOME FRIGGIN TURF - have been honed to sharpened perfection for thousands of years.

    learn anything from the rooskies?

    such monumental stupidity is at the core of the model u hup yo lep

  • ||

    You clearly are not paying attention. The reason that the Taliban have moved away from their original tactic, the Mobile Column, is because they were being destroyed. So they adjusted to a population centric PR campaign much the same as we did. They live and operate amongst the population. They do this for three reasons:
    1. When operating among the population they are able to cause CF to accidentally kill Afghan civilians. From their they use the gullibility of the American people to convince them that CF are just randomly killing civilians. For instance TB insurgents attacked CF in helmand province. The insurgents were firing from a village at a CF patrol outside that village. The CF responded because they were being attacked and accidently killed an Afghan girl.
    2. They are able to set up shadow governships and try to bring the people to their side through better governance.
    3.It is easy to hide amongst the population.

    The US could have tried to go with a scorched earth policy like the Soviets but we all know how that ended. So CF are under a great deal of restrictions during operations. So as I said the Taliban are greatly aided by the CF self inflicted handicaps.

  • ||

    the US supported the Taliban..that is a fact...US gave the Taliban $43 million...even CATO admits it. do you?

  • ||

    Nobody is denying that in the past the US has supported the Taliban. In fact the US has supported a lot of unsavory groups. Now it is coming back to bite them in the ass.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Okay, It is not a big stretch to see how this is going to play out. Do a little research look up a little thing called "night letters." People get those for letting women go to school. Imagine what would happen to a snitch.

  • ||

    your kids having a swell time at public school?

  • Shoeless Chris||

    What? Dude you are hysterical.

  • ||

    your kids aren't having a good time at public school. there's always the jesuits.

  • JohnD||

    I'm more interested in finding out when you get axed.

  • ||

    another compassionate neocon with an l on his t shirt

  • ||

    well yes these informants would be considered collateral damage. he isn't claiming moral superiority

    collateral damage has been sanctified by the military and our highest ranking govt poobahs.

    in war someone always dies.

  • marlok||

    So collateral damage is A-OK with you?

    "he isn't claiming moral superiority"
    Are you sure about that?

  • ||

    what does the military say about the acceptability/inevitability of collateral damage?

    in my view he is not claiming anything. he is doing what he thinks needs to be done.

    if he is right, then he is indeed morally superior.

    my personal assessment of the man is that he is morally superior to anything sitting in the pentagon with ribbons.

    yo

  • ||

    Your personal assessment doesn't amount to much. What exactly is right about what he is doing? What did he "expose" that iws so earth shattering. Have we seen video or reports of atrocities being committed. Don't even bring up the Apache video. That one has been analyzed to death and it has been determined that the guys they were shooting were armed insurgents. That is why no one lost their job over it. So enlighten us Wamsagongo. What exactly is right about what dipshit has done?

  • ||

    if there are no more secrets, then these fascist mf's can't function.

    truth must be hidden. propaganda rules.

    see the problem?

  • ||

    Once again I don't think you understand the nature of intelligence. Very little of it is actuall useful, firt of all. Secondly the secrets that really are important to keep are sources and methods. The reason most intel is classified is so the Intel Community won't reveal how they are getting the information and therefore lose the source. There is nothing sinister about what is in those documents. Nothing critical or earth shattering was revealed. One day you will learn that the world is an unpleasant place. Your idea that "truth" is some how going to make everything better shows your naiveté.

  • ||

    frankly there are no more secrets.

    live with it.

  • ||

    HA HA HA. Look up how th intel community compartmentalizes their information. Assange has a small amont of Secret documents. He has yet to get into TOP SECRET let alone the many many compartments inside the intel commuity. Assange got nothing. This is all going to prove to be his undoig. He has all this hype for his "secrets". He lets them out and it is completely anitclimactic. What a joke. He winds up hurting innocent people and proving the military ISN'T commiting war crimes. Good for the military, bad for Afghans.

  • ||

    consider this:

    your top secret protections are only as strong as your weakest link (pun) intended.

    people always try to cover their asses on the losing side of a phony war.

    we got better than top secret we got magnetic intuition sim sum

  • ||

    I used to think that the government was a huge, overarching, fascist machine. Bent on oppressing human rights wherever they found them. With that in mind I began doing research and talking to people who had direct accessto alot of these things. What I found is that it is the banality of their crimes that is offensive. The wost things the gov't and its agencies can be accused of is of aggregious wast of funding. THere is an office in one of these agencies that spent 600 dollars a chair for 300 chairs. Turns out the old chairs were fine and no one used the new chairs. Also I learned to a degree how it is set up. DoD set up their intel into compartments. If one is compromised the others will be safe. So Assange has nothing. No steady source, no back door into the network. This is his 15 minutes of fame. I hope the Gov't has learned to better protect its information so more lives won't be endangered.

  • ||

    the reason that we are still fighting this monumentally stupid war is that war is fundamentally necessary to sustain the chickenhawk compassionate neocon lifestyle.

    why are we in afghanistan?

    9/11 was an inside job. the official story is all surface gloss.

    wanna debate that one?

  • juris imprudent||

    if there are no more secrets, then these fascist mf's can't function.

    Oh, wait, I get it, you're on mommy's computer while she's out. I bet you're hoping she brings you back a cookie.

  • ||

    yum yum

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Sigh. Now we get into the moral relativism bit. Equating the joint chief's accepting some collateral damage after extraordinary and often tactically ungainly rules of engagement and targeting procedures (everyone from the commanding general of the region to his fleet of lawyers has to stamp off on a kinetic strike) with the stated goal of causing the absolute minimum collateral damage to a group of people that has the stated goal of causing as much death and destruction to foist a Seventh Century philosophy on a population, is pretty incredible. Say what you will about our presence there, but, please don't attempt to draw a parallel between the Taliban and the Joint Chiefs is ridiculous.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    * Chiefs ,its ridiculous.

  • ||

    always liked the name "joint chiefs"

    taliban are more like the 1776 insurgents against the machine like red coats.

  • ||

    OH MY GOD what a profound thought. I'm sure no one has thought of that one. Please regale us of accounts of decapitation and toddler hanging during the revolutionary war.

  • ||

    different um strokes for different folks. same ol death.

  • JohnD||

    Same old death? Looking forward to yours.

  • ||

    shaddup igor and drink your blood

  • ||

    you know people didn't think that stuff was cool

    nowadaze the game has changed.

    terror r us

  • Ron L||

    Yessir! Fighting for freedom and stuff! Mostly "stuff" that reflects a feudal society....

  • Ron L||

    Oops; that was in reply to this bit of crap:
    "taliban are more like the 1776 insurgents against the machine like red coats."

  • ||

    I figured. Lets see if we can list other similarities between the revolutionary war and the Afghan war. The revelutionary war was fought to seperate the colonists from an oppressive regime and forge their own country. The Taliban are fighting us so they can regain power and form an oppressive regime. The revolutionary war was fought so the colonists could enjoy rights they belived to be inalienable. The Taliban are fighting to regain power so they can seriously restrict their peoples' rights. Anything I am missing?

  • ||

    only your ability to reason

  • ||

    Wamsagongo everyoe of your inane comments has thorroughly been countered and refuted. Perhaps it is your own ability to reason that is in question. It is strange to see someone cling to patently false beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence. But I suppose if you were to make an educated decision based on the evidence before you that would force you to change your cliché self image as a "revolutionary" Read a few Christopher Hitches books and you will learn what all your "revolutuinary heroes, like Che Guevara, are responsible for.

  • ||

    hitchens is gone. god bless his soul.

  • ||

    He has esophogial cancer. While that is a very serious form he is not dead yet. He certainly doesn't see it that way. Hopefully his treatment will be successful. It will be a sad day indeed.

  • ||

    i can understand why you'd admire a guy like him but many progressives think he lost his way.

    for some reason he sold out.

  • ||

    It may appear that he sold out. I think what really happend is he grew up and recognized that the world is not what it appears to be as seen through a young man's eyes. He went to work camps in Cuba, he participated in socialist acitvist groups. It was his experience that shaped his views. It is because of that experience that he can easily debate and win on many of these issues. Most people who espouse socialist ideas have never actually experienced them or they turn a blind eye to the obious failings of those countries who adopted Socialism. He has seen it first hand and found that it was more opppressive and fascist than what was purported. As you have said many times in this thread "learn anything from history?". Apparently we haven't.

  • ||

    booze and debauchery did him in, turning away from his higher self.

  • ||

    I suppose Booze and smoking has led to his cancer. But it hasn't damaged his intellect and ability to marshal a coherent stance on a subject that is more than the "party" line. A rare quality indeed and we will be all the more poor when he leaves us.

  • ||

    sorry he espouses the party line in fancy language izall which the cromags dig as it adds a degree of false dignity to their pathos.

    he is also an atheist which in my view limits his thinking.

    and frankly he's simply another fascist sob. coulda been a true artist.

  • ||

    It appears you have little or no knowledge of Hitchens work or life. Forgive me if I disregard your opinion on this one.

  • ||

    have you read about eugene debs?

    now he was a socialist worth admiring.

  • DLM||

    The revelutionary war was fought to seperate the colonists from an oppressive regime and forge their own country.

    "Oppressive"? The British in the late 1700's under George III in relation to the American colonies? LOL. You have a very low bar for the use of that term.

  • ||

    Nay government who violates basic rights of its citizens or needlessly levies excessive taxes is oppressive in my book. So yes I do have a low bar for it.

  • ||

    you are on the verge of a whole new realm.

    enjoy

  • Ayn R. Key||

    Actually I don't consider those to be collateral damage.

    Collateral damage is when those who are not combatants on either side wind up dead. It could be as simple as a stray bullet that hits someone unfortunate enough to live near a battlefield.

    The Afghans who are put at risk are those who are collaborators with the USA's unjustified invasion.

  • ||

    galt's speech was awfully dumb.

  • ||

    I haven't read it but i heard it was just a rambling 60 page speech with no real point.

  • ||

    galt explains why he has to run the world and make love to his beautiful girlfriend.

    he is the alpha male

  • ||

    C O U L D be

  • ||

    If he keeps manipulating video or documents in order to advance his position, then he's neither, just a lying sack of weasel sh*t.

  • ||

    If he keeps manipulating video or documents in order to advance his position, then he's neither, just a lying sack of weasel sh*t an activist.

  • ||

    sounds like you have something to hide.

    do you still kick your dog?

  • .||

    Do you still suck yours?

  • ||

    what position is he advancing?

  • ||

    That the U.S. Military is teh eeeevil. And that all they do is kill innocents. It's the same kind of status-seeking BS that leads faux intellectuals to wear turtlenecks in August.

    You know, like Gerry Mak.

  • ||

    the so called leadership that created this war is evil.

  • juris imprudent||

    Including the current leadership that hasn't ended it? Or would that burst your Obama-bubble of reality.

  • ||

    obama was told what to do by the military.

  • Giordano Bruno sez hi||

    Sorry, but this guy ain't a Obama supporter. The looney Alex Jones crowd doesn't like Obama.

  • ||

    wrong

    i support obama.

    lesser of many evils

  • .||

    the so called leadership that created this war is evil.

    That would be your buddy, Osama bin Ladin. Yes, he is evil - just like you asswipe Marxists and Progressives.

  • ||

    oh i think maybe neocon has had a little sumthin to do with the war.

  • ||

    And unlike the Times, "they are an advocacy organization. They have a point of view, and an ideology..."

    I think there is a typo here

    should be:

    And like the Times, "they are an advocacy organization. They have a point of view, and an ideology..."

  • Jim Treacher||

    THANK you.

  • Ayn R. Key||

    Indeed. Most people forget that journalists are activists. The pretense that they are neutral observers is hypocrisy.

  • ||

    journalism is a good paycheck for most of that crowd. they know what the boss wants and if they don't provide it someone smarter and better looking will.

  • Slut Bunwalla||

    I'm not making any commentary on the guy's motives, ethics, etc. when I say that he has a truly, unbelievably punchable face. Seriously, he looks like Bill Maher but even douchier. What's the word for that? Backpigfeigst or whatever?

  • DRATER||

    "...when I say that he has a truly, unbelievably punchable face."

    That is a common trait among pale, skinny Austrailan men. full disclosure - I'm related, by marriage, to one of these punching bags

  • ||

    He has a disturbing resemblance to "Angela" on The Office.

  • ||

    the same can be said of your angry face.

  • theocrat||

    Backpfeifengesicht

  • ||

    ghoulish thinking from a criminal neocon

  • Shoeless Chris||

    You must be really new here. We may be many things here but NeoCon is not one of them.

  • ||

    you've been living too long squashed beneath the jack-boot

  • juris imprudent||

    DRINK!

  • ||

    fiddley dink

  • ||

    this place needs a laugh.

    would you post a picture of yourself?

  • Old Mexican||

    So by all means, Julian, stump for more openness, publish more leaks, continue your attempts to “achieve justice.” But stop calling yourself a journalist.

    And the cat hair starts flying all over . . .

  • ||

    such concern over a label

    govt and biz need functioning transparency.

    the internet encourages free flow of info.

    the fascists are scurrying like rats caught out at sunrise.

  • Government of Wolves||

    Who's a fascist? Really? If you want to read a dictionary and figure out what that word actually means, please feel free to return and modify your language.

  • ||

    dictionary.com says a fascist is:

  • ||

    oops

    fascist:

    a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views.

    yoo hoo neocon yoo hoo

  • ||

    tell us about ike's m-i-c warning?

  • ||

    I don't believe that Obama is concidered right wing. Dicatatorial maybe. He is responsible for these documents as well. You think none of these were produced under his watch. It seems to me that you are still living in the 60s. Guess what buddy times have changed things are even more murky than they were. So for something you clearly have no clue about you have preoduced a lot of inane opinions.

  • ||

    progressives see obama as a man with no balls, which certainly makes him right wing suspect.

    this is a neocon chicken hawk war.

    you know the m-i-c and your lack of response?

    as for murky, wade in.

  • ||

    News Flash. The Neo-Cons have essentially been destroyed by all their failed policies. Progressives, while different policies, are espousing policies that have failed already throughout the world. I have gotten more involved in these murky events probably far more than you. Whether we agree with the causes for going to war or not we are at war. We have made a mess and now we have a responsibility to clean it up. Something you probably would never dare to do.

  • ||

    you wouldn't recognize a progressive if he jumped in your face and sang kumbaya.

    i am not at war and millions and million even billions of other people are not at war.

    turn out the lights and go home.

  • ||

    That's not a good description. At all. Dictionary.com must not be very good.

  • ||

    please give me another definition

  • wtf||

    fascist:

    a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views.

    What could be more dictatorial and/or right wing than a bunch of religious fanatics like the Taliban?

  • ||

    neocon fascists

  • wtf||

    I don't think so. Neocons are fucking choirboys compared to the atavistic Taliban.

  • ||

    yeah sure

  • DLM||

    a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views.

    "extreme" right-wing views is the modern defintion promoted by liberals over the decades. Nor would this describe neo-conservatives anyway. You sound like just another ignoramus who misuses the term for pretty much anyone you don't like. I'll just bet you call every other person a 'racist', too. I'm optimistic, though, and expect you'll wise up one day.

    From www.dictionary.com, just to add a little context. You'll note Fascism tends to take a bit from the statist tendencies of both the Right and the Left, which is why it was to be a 'third way' taking the best of both. Instead, we got the worst of both. Not a lot different from how Communism (as viewed by those without blinders) is too often practiced.

    fascism
    –noun
    1. ( sometimes initial capital letter ) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
    2. ( sometimes initial capital letter ) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
    3. ( initial capital letter ) a fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.

    fascist
    - noun
    1. a person who believes in or sympathizes with fascism.
    2. ( often initial capital letter ) a member of a fascist movement or party.
    3. a person who is dictatorial or has extreme right-wing views.

  • ||

    One would hope a two party system would yeild the best of both. As we can all see that is sadly not true.

  • ||

    you get by the word or pound?

  • ||

    u get PAID by the word or lb?

  • ||

    God I wish I got paid for this. I was wondering how people get involved in that. Bet you could make a ton of money off of this mental masturbation.

  • ||

    i was talking to the other guy.

  • ||

    just as obama is not a socialist, man that one makes us laugh .....

    you truly truly do NOT have much understanding of the liberal progressive mind. kucinicich and franken okay but constrained

    at this point in time, that truth gives us an enormous leveraging device. wikileaks is only one example of the old peanut butter conspiracy which continues to spread.

  • ||

    But they haven't leaked anything of note. In fact no one cares about it anymore. No charges pressed, no Afghan pull out, no apology from anyone about anything. There is no conspiracy or instituionalized brutality and wikileaks proved it.

  • Old Mexican||

    When attacked for exposing the names of Afghan informants, and potentially exposing them to Taliban retribution, Assange lapsed into incoherence[...]

    I would say the following: If people were really serious about the well being of Afghanis, they would not have invaded a country and turn brothers into enemies. Your sudden, new-found and expedient concern for their safety is really touching, my heart is bleeding.

    But I guess he was caught unawares.

  • ||

    Amen. Since the U.S. military is actively killing Afghan civilians, their sudden concern for the safety of their informants is slightly hypocritical, to say the least.

  • Government of Wolves||

    Except if you look at what the actual strategy is, no we are not 'actively' killing civilians. Counter-Insurgency strategy is based around the protection of civilian populations.

    There is a sea of moral distance between that strategy, which cannot wholly eliminate collateral damage and tries to protect civilians as much as possible, and the Taliban raping and lynching entire families purposefully because Assange didn't want to black out a few names.

    Like doing so would have hurt the information value of the documents.

  • ||

    Where does this idea that the Military is actively killing civilians. I believe there have recently been a lot of issues of the rules of engagement needlessly endangering NATO troop’s lives. You might wonder why those rules of engagement are there in the first place. I will tell you why. The Afghan campaign is a PR campaign. The strategy has essentially been "Hugs not Drugs". The strategy is to make the Afghan people like us more than the Taliban. Now I am skeptical about the effectiveness of this but what I will say is the military leadership is dedicated to it. So they have set up rules of engagement that are designed to reduce to almost zero the civilian casualties. So if you believe that the NATO troops are indiscriminately killing civilians out there just remember, don't believe the Hype.

  • Giordano Bruno sez hi||

    I can't stand the reflexive "The U.S Military is just slaughtering civilians" far-left bullshit. There's never any nuance to it. It's always My Lai 24/7, 365 to these idiots. Nevermind the great lengths McChrystal went to in order to avoid civilian deaths.

    The inverse of this of course, is the "This war would be over by now if OBAMA WOULD JUST LET THEM WIN" Tom Clancy fantasy the NeoCon/Fascist Right adores. Y'see, they haaaate the Gov't but they lovvvve the cops and generals that embody coercive Gov't power. Nevermind that McChrystal was the one pressuring troops to keep civilian deaths down, *not* Obama.

    When it comes to the Afghanistan debate, I feel like a line from the opening crawl of Revenge of the Sith sums it up: "There are heroes on both sides. Evil is everywhere."

  • ||

    let us know when you find something real

    and then maybe we can discuss the internationally famous helicopter video as well.

  • ||

    I have you ever actually watched the video. In it you can clearly see that a couple of the guys have AK-47s slung on their backs. If it was such a heinous masacre why has no one been brought up on charges? I have seen guys be brought up on war crimes charges for far less. You need to look at things objectively and stop believing everything you see on TV. Think critically. No conspiracy theory stands up to critical thinking.

  • ||

    counter insurgency is all about terrorizing the citizenry into obedience.

  • Government of Wolves||

    No, it isn't, you thick log.

    CI strategy involves winning the allegiance of the civilian population and subverting any attachment they have to enemy forces.

    In practical terms, this means pressuring local government to reduce corruption and abuses, providing security, rolling out medical and humanitarian services and highlighting enemy atrocities.

  • ||

    the afghani think you're devil worshipers.

  • ||

    It's Afghan not Afghani.

  • ||

    as if some young scared witless trigger happy fool gets nervous.

  • JohnD||

    A so called Civilian carrying a weapon or planning a bombing is fair game. Do you have a problem understanding that? Fool!

  • ||

    it's not a game.

  • .||

    Game as in prey - not play, you fool. Perhaps English isn't your native language?

  • ||

    you bomb deer?

  • .||

    If they get in the way.

  • ||

    then you're fair game.

  • ||

    "I would say the following: If people were really serious about the well being of Afghanis, they would not have invaded a country and turn brothers into enemies." I agree that the US has no business in Afghanistan or Iraq, but to think that it was the invasion of Afghanistan that caused the turmoil there, is ignorant.

  • ||

    by garsh golly we is nation builders.

    ah yerp

  • ||

    I missed the point of your silly post.

  • .||

    It was probably pointless.

  • ||

    yeah your post was silly first which is why i made a silly remark loop.

  • Awk||

    Old Mexican has it exactly right.

    +1

  • juris imprudent||

    One can only contemplate that when Assange has his way and "ends war" and the rough men who once protected him are gone, he will eventually stand face to face with the barbarian. The one that knows or cares not for Assange's sensitive qualities. At that moment, when his existence is about to come to an abrupt and bloody end, will Assange still have that same stupid look on his face?

  • ||

    prediction:

    when you are hauled away for war crimes you will need a change of panties.

  • Prediction||

    You will regret your posts in the morning when you sober up.

    If not, will you at least explain them then?

  • ||

    honest thinking required

  • ||

    I find it hilarious that tools that throw around the term fascist are the first to talk about hauling off people for war crimes.

  • ||

    Why are you lot feeding the trolls. It only encourages it.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    aww do I have to? This one is especially eager to display his idiocy and bumper sticker philosophies. Its actually kind of fun to egg this one on.

  • ||

    man we got us a list of fascists you would not believe.

    wonder if wikileaks will publish?

  • juris imprudent||

    Only if you can separate the pages - which I doubt.

  • ||

    you mean files

  • Shoeless Chris||

    What exactly are the fascist policies we are espousing here? Opinions on the war itself run the gamut every thing from, "Get out yesterday!" to "Maybe we shouldn't have gone in to begin with, but we should finish what we."

  • ||

    fascists are vampires of empire.

  • ||

    ya mean im not allowed a prediction?

  • JohnD||

    Ands whi is going to do that? You? You stupid little man?

  • JohnD||

    Oops... WHO not whi. Asshoes like you make me crazy. It's a damn good thing that we are not having a face to face conversation. You would not like the outcome.

  • ||

    kumbaya cmag

  • Spazmo||

    One can only contemplate that when Assange has his way and "ends war" and the rough men who once protected him are gone, he will eventually stand face to face with the barbarian.

    Of course: the only thing standing between Julian Assange and a ragtag group of Islamic zealots with no territorial ambition beyond Afganistan and the loopier parts of Pakistan, is the US military. They're fighting to protect him. Sure.

  • DDavis||

    If Assange wants to spread the truth but limit collateral damage, he should ask for help in redacting the documents from the military, and the military should agree to help him.

    Let them help him identify information *he* doesn't want to see spread.

  • ||

    So is Radley Balko an activist or a journalist?

    He does great journalism but obviously has an extreme and radical point of view that all people should be treated equally and fairly before the law and he has an activists zeal in what he does IMO...why do such distinctions matter so long as people like Radley and Assange hold the States' feet to the fire.

  • juris imprudent||

    why do such distinctions matter

    Is Balko doing something that puts peoples lives in jeopardy?

  • Ayn R. Key||

    Yeah. The lives of the Afghans and the lives of the troops are in danger the longer the war goes on. Wikileaks shortens the war, and Balko dislikes what Wikileaks does.

  • ||

    Wiki leaks has yet to have any real impact. It has not shortened the war. It was an insignificant event after the data was relaeased and everyone saw how banal the data was.

  • ||

    Does Balko photoshop the videos he posts to slant the stories as Wikileaks did in "Collateral Murder"?

  • Awk||

    this is garbage. they released the ENTIRE video.

  • ||

    Does Balko lie?

    Because Assange did by omitting important information in the "Collateral Damage" video.

    He's neither an activist or journalist. He's a propagandist that specializes in viral half-truths.

  • ||

    wikileaks is a VERY CAREFUL organization whose time has come.

    if attacked they have a couple of million sensitive documents to be released immediately.

    guess what? this small band of code breakers can't be stopped from getting their stuff out on the net. they are smarter than an army of govt hacks combined.

    tuff noogies neocon.

    suhweeet

  • Groaty Dick||

    Fuck your mother, commie.

  • ||

    there there

    now now

  • ||

    Why don't you say allah hu'akbar and be done with it?

  • ||

    Yes, they very carefully cropped out images of RPGs, they very carefully edited video to ensure a favorable conclusion, and they very carefully molded the data into their chosen narrative.

  • Awk||

    Why do you keep repeating this lie? Just because you keep saying they edited the video doesn't make it true. They released the ENTIRE video, end to end.

  • juris imprudent||

    Alright I'll bite - how do you know they released the entire video? Because they said they did?

  • ||

    maybe because it was longer than a sound byte

  • ||

    sounds like he learned well from your side.

  • ||

    Again I ask what exactly has wikileaks exposed. Apparently the documents aren't even top secret. They haven't exactly brought the US government to its knees. It has brought Asghan sources to their knees just before they are beheaded by the Taliban.

  • ||

    suddenly we are having a conversation and that's good.

  • ||

    So what is your response? What is it that wikileaks has done that is so groundbreaking other than be a giant hypocite. They have needlessly endangered people lives. Isn't that what this is all about? Your hero Julian Assange is nothing more than a opportunist. Do you know how he got those documents? Well it wasn't through his amazing "hacking" skills. I have been following this story since before the Helicopter video was released. Bradley Manning admitted to smuggling the video out as well as tens of thousands of documents. This fell into Wikileak's incompetent lap.

  • ||

    fact is that wikileaks has millions of docs from every agency imaginable because good people are sick of the bullshit.

  • ||

    Really? And we are of course sure of their authenticity? In this age of photoshop and powerpoint is it outside the realm of possibility that some of them are indeed fake. Will it be a stunning game changer like the documents already released? I goody I hope so. I can learn more about the logistics in Afghanistan. There is't anything from any of the 3 letter agencies in the first batch. Wamsagongo has never looked at the files.

  • ||

    no

    propaganda based upon fear and hatred is your trip.

  • ||

    In which post have I participated in fear or hate mongering? Please point them out. I believe there is a disconnect between your keyboard and your brain. Or perhaps there isn't and that is the problem. You have not made one meaningful contribution to this thread. It seems that the prevailing opinion here is that what Julian Assange did by releasing these documents was wrong due to the fact that it endangers lives. His credibility is in question due to lies of omission and doctored data. Some here believe that if the information contained within these documents reveals evidence of wrong doing then there will be some benefit in their release. However when the documents are reviewed they turn out to primarily be mundane situation reports. There are reports that show evidence of civilian casualties but not even close to the amount that is being sensationalized by the media from both sides. Was Julian Assange an activist or a journalist? I believe he is an opportunistic activist rather than a journalist. A journalist would have held on to these documents and analyzed them. They would have released their analysis along with the pertinent documents over time. Assange did not do this; instead he posted them on the internet in the most melodramatic way possible. He hoped this would have the effect of scaring people about the big bad government and blurring the reality of what was actually contained in the documents. He was successful on both counts. He did this to send a message and hopefully change American policy in the direction of pulling out of Afghanistan and Iraq. These are the actions of an activist. The only reason he was able to do this was through pure luck. Army Pvt. Bradley Manning, who was disgruntled and likely maladjusted, decided he would take it upon himself to steal a huge amount of data at random. He didn’t have a plan for any of this he just did it so he could get back at the Government. My guess is that Manning has been a giant fuck up since he has been in the Army and blamed everyone else but himself. Along comes Assange and takes the data off of Manning’s hands, consequently leaving Bradley holding the bag just in time to go to jail, likely for the rest of his life. What does Assange do? He goes on a luxury tour around the world touting his grand success. Wamsagongo, perhaps you could expound on why you think Assange and his actions are benefitting society. Assange has not only endangered the lives of others but he also took advantage of an idiot kid. So yeah he is a great guy.

  • ||

    well maybe if you guys YELL & THREATEN some more, that could convince me.

  • ||

    Again your response has no relation to anything previously posted. Do you even read what other people post. Or do you just say whatever pops into your head. Try to refute what people say based on the merits. Some very good points have been made on either side of this debate but none by you. I think you are to uninformed to have a credible opinion.

  • ||

    and thank you very much for spending so much time and effort informing me of my folly.

    why must you label assange? he is who and what he is, a moral man who opposes the horrors of big govt and biz.

    haven't you noticed a public awakening?

    look around, ay? and have a nice day

  • SK||

    That's pretty funny, jumping all over him for "labeling" Assange, when you've spent all of your time on this board slinging insults left and right.

    And I don't know about Toolbag, but I for damned sure haven't noticed any public awakening. Just the same old gossipy, rubbernecking America that I know and love.

  • ||

    har har harrrrr

  • ||

    ya mean to say the poor guy was "disgruntled and maladjusted"?

    good thing he's the only one and we got him in some gitmo in isloation 'cause he might have swallowed some more files or worse has a contagious disease.

  • ||

    Turns out he is gay. Which I found very interesting. So now everyone is going to say this is some how a conspiracy to prove that gays can't be in the military. Have faith there are plenty of gays in the military and everyone in their unit knows they are. They really only get kicked out if someone is just an asshole and pushes them out (exception not the rule) or they want out and so they tell their officer.

  • Duckworth-Lewis||

    to “build a historical record, an intellectual record, of how civilization actually works in practice,” in its four years of existence he has produced a handful of interesting and impressive scoops, but the dreaded “mainstream media” has done far more.

    How many scoops have you got in the last four years that you can directly measure having an effect on people's lives either positively or otherwise?

  • ||

    there are many scoops of ice cream but not so many types of cone says ancient druidish proverb.

  • Mark||

    Why is Reason propagating the myth that only people who pretend to be unbiased can be journalists. If thats the case, then Michael C. Moynihan should stop considering himself a journalist.

  • ||

    Wait, I thought this was a libertarian magazine? Isn't military lies and murder worthy of mention? Isn't it important to discourage the web of secrecy the state holds? Assange is a hero, plain and simple.

  • Hate Potion Number Nine||

    The Reasonoids are upset that he gave the info out for free. Had Assange sold the documents at 50 cents a word they'd be cheering him on. Endangering human life is only acceptable when profit is at stake (it's the "Anything for a fast buck" rule).

  • ||

    Um, Wikileaks lied...
    You can have philosophical differences about the need for our foreign policy, but you can't prove your point by lying. It basically destroys the credibility of the leaker.

    They left out 30 minutes of video and carefully cropped all of the images in order to expunge any evidence of wrongdoing on the side of the "photographers"...up to and including RPG-7s.

  • a||

    For the last fucking time, they released both the full video and a shortened one (clearly labeled as such).

  • Awk||

    Repeating a lie does not make it true. The entire video was released.

  • ||

    if you repeat it often enough ....

  • ||

    While I cannot disagree strongly enough with endangering people's lives, I have to say that the existense of Wikileaks - an entity that can't be gagged by invisible gag orders, or controlled by mainstream sensibilites or taken off the airwaves by corporate sponsor disapproval gives me hope. It is sui generis. It is the only true, free press left; albeit an online press. For humanitarian reasons, Wikileaks should have removed the names of informants or military personnel in sensitive areas, I believe, but apart from making that sad error, they give us something that exists nowhere else and certainly not in the mainstream media - that being information we should have access to but that is kept from us for a variety of political (read "spin") reasons.

  • ||

    you need to look into the story more closely.

    the reason they withheld 15,000 files from release is that they had concerns about endangering people.

    assange and his team were very careful with the documents, and worked under difficult pressured circumstances.

    so far there is no evidence of anyone being harmed. it would be page one for the next week on all of murdoch's rags if and when.

    again, these are very MORAL people willing to risk their lives for the truth.

  • .||

    You don't know the meaning of morality, you bit of excrement. The only lives those people are risking are those of others.

  • ||

    ten commandments

  • .||

    Ten Commandments? Who read them to you?

  • ||

    moses

  • ||

    How many people need to inform you that you are a morally repugnant turd and unbearably stupid as well? You wouldn't know morality if it bit you in on your poseur ass. There are Afghans risking their lives every day trying to hold off the possibility of the Taliban returning to power. But putrid, posturing pukes like you claim that smug, narcissistic, self-serving excrement like Assange and his associates are moral and are risking anything? You are a vile, pointless little cretin.

  • ||

    you the poster boy?

  • ||

    So I guess you feel the same way about the Climategate leaker/s? Those leakers truly risked a lot in exposing the existence of an real-life conspiracy dedicated to preserving a political and financial agenda from inconvenient scientific truth. I haven't noticed them parading around the world, feted by the media. Assange is a douchebag poseur.

    Talk to Ayaan Hirsi Ali about the dangers of actually speaking truth to power.

  • ||

    read some gandhi re speaking truth to power

  • Jesse||

    So I guess you feel the same way about the Climategate leaker/s? Those leakers truly risked a lot in exposing the existence of an real-life conspiracy dedicated to preserving a political and financial agenda from inconvenient scientific truth. I haven't noticed them parading around the world, feted by the media. Assange is a douchebag poseur.

    The climategate emails were released via WikiLeaks.

  • ||

    God you just believe anyone tells you. The newest batch that wikileaks is preparing to release is mostly corparate documents. This al reads like a bad bond script.

  • ||

    you know the docs explaining where the off shore money she go poof

  • ||

    WTF are you talking about?

  • ||

    come mr tally ban

    tally me banana

    day ooooooo

  • ||

    say whatever happened to the two trillion bucks that rummie said the pentagon had misplaced like just before 9/11?

  • ||

    I'm not convinced it is a true free press. It seems to me that it has a clear cut agenda that it makes no effort to hide. While I am in total agreement that in this day and age of news outlets that are little more than paid cheerleaders for a particular agenda we need a source that is unbiased and cn be trusted. Wikilieaks is no it.

  • ||

    good job thus far.

    dig deeper

  • ||

    wikileaks will release not just state info, but personal info that an individual would not want released, whether its afghan informants or membership lists of politically incorrect parties. All at the whim of an organization which decides what to leak if it serves their cause.

  • Dello||

    @Pizzly,

    "Isn't it important to discourage the web of secrecy the state holds? Assange is a hero, plain and simple."

    In fact, he's Obama's personal hero, since Obama is all in favor of more transparency and stuff...

  • ||

    "In fact, he's Obama's personal hero, since Obama is all in favor of more transparency and stuff..."

    Lol. But really, I don't get how people are so against wikileaks. Our military is "supposed" to be voluntary, but as long as there are secrets it's not even close.

  • ||

    I'm against Wikileaks because I don't subscribe to the "information wants to be free" hacker-culture horseshit. And I'm against Julian Assange in particular because he's principally an egomaniac, not an activist, and certainly not a hero.

  • ||

    truth needs to be TOLD.

    for example, the people need to know that more civilians are being killed than reported.

    this war is KILLING the usa.

  • .||

    for example, the people need to know that more civilians are being killed than reported.

    Really? By which side?

  • ||

    your side

  • wtf||

    Bullshit - pure and simple.

  • ||

    history is always written by the victorious.

  • ||

    How would you know what's going on in Afghanistan, you wretched little tool?

  • ||

    i have google maps

  • wtf||

    Google Maps don't show real time views, imbecile.

  • ||

    they do when you have the software.

  • wtf||

    Uh..yeah. And I suppose you want us to believe you have access to that kind of software? Well, imbecile, talk's cheap - takes money to buy whiskey, or money talks and bullshit walks. Put up or shut up.

  • ||

    o pretty please believe me

  • Ron L||

    Take away the self-righteous non-sequitors and the hyperbole, and what's left?
    Uh, nothing.

  • ||

    and 90,000 sensitive files

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.7.10 @ 8:14PM|#
    "and 90,000 sensitive files"

    Read them, did you?

  • ||

    didn't read a single one.

    don't have to

    to know which way the wind is blowin.

  • wtf||

    It's blowin' up your ass - along with the pot smoke apparently.

  • ||

    you're kinda cute

  • ||

    IT WASN'T THE TRUTH

  • ||

    Got proof? Guess what its not in those leaked documents. I don't think Wamsagongo has even read any of them.

  • ||

    read the guardian's excellent article or even your hated new york times

    use some discernment but not too much)

  • ||

    If that is your evidence then you are pathetic. Don't be scared of all those cute little dots those aren't all CIV CAS events. I went through the spreadsheet. I am guessing I am more qualified to look at this than you and anyone a the Guardian. Of all the possible CIVCAS (Civilian Casualties) events there are only 44 rows. The vast majority of those are Afghan on Afghan violence. Guess what everytime it says Army it doesn't mean US Army it means Afghan Army. There are a few CF CIVCAS events and most of those were accidents. As I have said Don't believe the Hype. Think for yourself, look at the actuall data your self. If that is your evidence then you are pathetic. I went through the spreadsheet. I am guessing I am more qualified to look at this than you and anyone a the Guardian. Of all the possible CIVCAS (Civilian Casualties) events there are only 44 rows. The vast majority of those are Afghan on Afghan violence. Guess what everytime it says Army it doesn't mean US Army it means Afghan Army. There are a few CF CIVCAS events and most of those were accidents. As I have said Don't believe the Hype. Think for yourself, look at the actuall data your self. My god this wikileaks thing would be good for the military if it weren't for a public that is reactionary and so willing to blame those who are actually being effected. You people make me sick.

  • ||

    t

    that was nice.

    i love our military and feel sorry for everything happening to good people everywhere.

    i don't give a hoot what's in these files. i know what's going on because i learned a long time ago to read between the lines.

  • ||

    Reading comprehension seems hard enough for you. Don't try to read between the lines. Your head may explode.

  • ||

    No you don't have any love for our military. If you did you would see that continued leaks are not healthy for them. The documents do contain information that reveals how the military operates. These are going to be used by the Taliban to kill more of our soldiers. So save me your GHandi crap you care only for your own sad self image.

  • ||

    good

    time to leave that country bub

  • ||

    Exactly what do you think the Afghans should do when we leave? Whether we agree with going to war or not we are at war. If we leave the Afghans will pay the price. I'm not sure if you are aware of the history but after the Russians pulled out Afghanistan was racked by civil war and rampaging warlords. It was one of the darkest periods in the countries history. The Taliban put a stop to that. They installed themselves and set up a brutal government under Shuria law. If we leave can expect that to happen again. Do we have no obligation or responsibilty to them?

  • ||

    your convenient frame and description are blindly biased almost hopelessly so.

  • ||

    Qualify that satement. I have used historical events for my analysis.

  • ||

    for one thing

    you believe in the mission (blinding filter).

    for another

    you don't understand the people of that historic land (although you ARROGANTLY think you do). really what outsider could?

    because you have been taught a lot of bullshit about your own country that just ain't so.

    is some of the problem

  • ||

    I am well more studied in the history of the Afghan people than you give me credit. Also I never have said that I agree with the mission. In fact I have alluded to the fact we probaly shouldn't be there. However I do believe in responsibility. If yoyu jump into a lake to save a drowning person you don't leave them 100 feet from the shore. Now whether we through Afghanistan into the lake or not is a matter worth debating. I am willing you cannot name three members of Karzai's Cabinet. Or the capital of Helmand. Do you know why the director of the Afghan National Security Directorate resigned? What is a great way to make friends with an Afghan? WHat are the two primay languages of Afghanistan? I'll give you one Dari? Dari is considered an ancient form of what language? I am willing to bet you can't answer a single one of these question with out the internet. I acan answer these and many others. I am well aware of what goes on in Afghanistn because I wish to have informed opinions. Give it a shot some time. It's pretty interesting.

  • ||

    i give you a lot of credit i think you're a decent fellow when you're not wearing your asshole on your sleeve.

    as stated a few times here: i smoked some really good hash in the sixties, made a lasting impression. created an empathetic and mystical aura of subterranean homesick blues.

    you're right i don't know the names of karzai's gangsta brothers. why is that important? life is not a pop quiz.

  • ||

    I believe it is important to be informed. I find that more often than not people are forming opinions based on the bullshit they are fed by the Media of today. I don't care what websites you visit, news you watch, or pamplets you read, they are all trying to force an opinion on you. I think if more people were willing to go out of their way to learn about a situation we may not find our selves in the many messes we are drowning in today. Also I don't think got into an Hash in the 60s. I suspect you weren't even alive then. My guess is you were born in the 90s. If that is not the case then act your age and show that you have learned something from your own history and experience. As for being an Asshole, I think som self reflection is required on your part, you seem to think that it is OK to leave peopel in the Lurch just because it is hard to help them.

  • ||

    geeeze louise

  • ||

    I don't think you much care about what kills America. I will grant you that these wars are having a devastating effect on America and are unhealthy. I don't think you care or know why. You just want latch onto the cliche of beeing against the man wiithout even understanding what it is you are against. What a hollow life.

  • ||

    gongggggg

  • ||

    information NEEDS to be free.

    info doesn't have a bias.

  • juris imprudent||

    Our military is "supposed" to be voluntary, but as long as there are secrets it's not even close.

    Voluntary doesn't have to mean stupid. Secrecy in military matters makes some sense if you want to maintain an advantage. If you don't want the advantage, or a military at all, that is a different matter.

    Now, does the military cover its ass just like any other organization of human beings - of course, and penetrating that veil is reasonable. But you have to read thru all that shit to expose the right stuff - not just release all of it without due consideration. Sorry if that implies a bit of work rather than simply basking in the glow of the praise of the ignorati.

  • ||

    get to work

  • ||

    but as long as there are secrets it's not even close.

    That's stupid.

  • Xenocles||

    "Our military is "supposed" to be voluntary, but as long as there are secrets it's not even close."

    I'ma need you to go ahead and flesh that out with some actual connective logic there. Also the scare quotes go around voluntary, not supposed.

  • lol||

    were you touching yourself when you wrote this?

  • ||

    Assange's bio pieces seem to point to a much more fragmented and less formal education than other Australians receive. We should therefore not be surprised to see that coming out in what he says, does or writes. However, play the ball and not the man. He is absolutely spot on that the media has been napping for ages now. Look at all the stuff Colbert and Stewart do - analysis and interviews we should be seeing as mainstream media, but are not. I could cite many, many examples of the media not doing its job. If the media were doing a fine job, there would be no need for Wikileaks. Clearly, whistleblowers do not find media avenues for their material credible, safe or worthy of the risk. And by the way, Wikileaks contains more than just US military documents-Americans might be surprised to learn that.

  • ||

    Colbert and Stewart? You can't be serious. They are mediocre comedians, Daniel Tosh will kick their asses, literally.

  • juris imprudent||

    No shit. There is a world of difference between journalism and entertainment. Reminds me of Network - from the executive perspective.

  • ||

    You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won't have it!

  • ||

    colbert is superb. stewart smokes too much herb for his own good.

    stewart is greatly admired by the university types worldwide.

  • ||

    "Wikileaks contains more than just US military documents-Americans might be surprised to learn that." Boy I know I would. What other countries secret military documents can be found there?

  • ||

    paraguay

  • ||

    jock strap sizes of the national soccer team for those who care.

  • ||

    julian assange is a genius and very very articulate. at 16 he was a famous hacker code breaker. do they teach that in schoolie?

    he walks the walk. every media outlet is falling over itself in the mad rush to get coverage.

    superb baritone too

  • Dude||

    Ah, at first I thought you were just trolling this thread, but now I see.

    Julian! How's it going? Or is that Julian's mom?

  • .||

    It's probably what came out of Julian's Mom's ass when she was sick.

  • juris imprudent||

    No, probably a snot-nosed, pimple-faced wannabe. He probably thinks Julian is getting laid with all his fame.

  • ||

    beep beep

    beeeeeeeep

  • ||

    um

  • ||

    anything you wish to discuss bubba?

    and who is john galt?

  • .||

    He's your worst fucking nightmare.

  • ||

    last time i checked galt was a fictional character is a second rate book.

  • ||

    ditto

  • ||

    what-me-book

  • ||

    How about we discuss how much everyone is tooling your pathetic smug little ass, you buttnut?

  • ||

    check your blood pressure

  • ||

    check your blood pressure

  • ||

    please check your blood pressure.

  • ||

    the molten iron?

  • ||

    yes please tell me about the molten iron that burned for weeks in the sub-basements of the wtc's.

  • ||

    The more interesting story is why the US gov demanded wikileaks return the documents and delete them.

    I bet if they release any more, the US will put Assange on the FBI 10 most wanted list.

  • ||

    o prolly for the same reason that ol bin laden never made it to the most wanted list.

  • ||

    Uh, actually he did...the molten iron?

  • ||

    yes you are right but interestingly not for 9/11 but for prior stuff.

    im typing quickly, with not much deep thought generally required here.

  • Sidd Finch||

    joe, Chony, MNG and all of Dan T's personalities can retire now. They couldn't gang rape a thread and make it worse than this.

  • ||

    Now I miss Joe. *sniff*

  • jimi hendrix||

    Heyyyy Joe, where you going with that gun in your hand.

  • yup||

    I guess it all depends on which deaths you admire more.

  • Mike DeSoto||

    Very few journalists make the distinction between journalist and activist. Most of them think the words mean the same thing.

  • ||

    tell that to the wall st journal

  • ||

    or

    usa today for all for your cutting edge news

  • ||

    Imagine if when the Nuremburg Trials were held, those on trial had been the leakers, instead of the sick, twisted, governments committing the war crimes!

  • Ron L||

    First godwin!

  • Xenocles||

    Does Godwin apply in the thread of an article containing a hyperbolic Nazi comparison?

  • Ron L||

    Interesting question.
    The article references Assange godwining his claims, so that might qualify as the first godwin of the thread.

  • ||

    Nope. The first godwin was, naturally, from Assange himself at the top of the article and in its ripest form -- a reference to Nazi concentration camps:

    "Assange asked attendees of the 2010 Oslo Freedom Forum to remember the “statement that was put by the Nazis on front of concentration camps that ‘work brings freedom,’..."

  • juris imprudent||

    Hmm, perhaps that was more of a meta-Godwin.

  • matt||

    The NYT won't even use the word "torture" to describe what the US does, even though they're quick to use that word when foreign torturers are being discussed. They're activists, too, and if they'd been a little bit more responsible and unbiased, then maybe there'd be no need for this silly guy Assange.

    It's their fault he exists.

  • ||

    uk's guardian and germany's der spiegel were very willing and eager as well

    something about the competitive nature of capitalism where the capitalist sells that last bit of thick rope to the long-haired drooling phreakazoid

  • matt||

    Indeed.

    I'm sure state-owned newspapers would be far more eager to call their bosses torturers.

  • Pravda||

    Only when they tell us to.

  • ||

    no but wikileaks might

  • matt||

    Replace "might" with "did." Now replace "did" with "did in a capitalistic society."

    Doesn't that feel better? You're catching on.

  • ||

    to?

  • ||

    Journalist? Activist?

    Traitor works for me. Pro-Fascist too.

    As Orwell said in 1942, "Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other."

  • ||

    assange is a truth revealer and not at all a pacifist.

    truth tellers understand the consequences of truth telling.

  • ||

    HE LIED YOU TWIT

  • ||

    proof?

  • ||

    the molten iron?

  • ||

    * POOLS * of m i

  • ||

    One can only betray that to which one owes loyalty. Assange owes nothing to the U.S., he is an Australian citizen.
    Whatever else he might possibly be, he is not a traitor.

    Your view is so typically American. Not only do the citizens of this country owe blind allegiance to whatever the U.S. decides to do, but apparently everyone else in the world owes the same blind allegiance - in your world.

    BTW it's 2010, not 1942. Did you mean to call Assange pro-terrorist? Or did you mean to say, "if you're not for me, you're agin me", like they say in the hills. It's not a particularly sophisticated worldview there - or anywhere.

    Orwell, really! You're quoting Orwell
    against Wikileaks without any obvious sense of irony at all.

  • huxley||

    Yes, I'm quoting Orwell. I've read most of his books and fair number of his essays, plus a biography and the Hitchens volume, "Why Orwell Still Matters." Far more than you have, I'd bet.

    You probably don't know that Orwell secretly gave names of his former leftist comrades to the British government and I'm glad there was no weaselly traitor like Assange around to leak that bit of information while Orwell was alive.

    Assange is an Australian citizen and Australia has soldiers fighting in Afghanistan too. So yes, I consider Assange a traitor in the strict sense of betraying his country as well as the larger sense of betraying freedom and democracy.

  • ||

    Orwell gave us a chilly vision of a totalitarian world. He gave us "big brother". He named our dark fears about unchecked power and control. The helplessness of the individual against that crushing, twisting power of the unfettered state. He showed us a world of disinformation.

    Freedom and democracy are important to protect so that we never become that world. However, freedom and democracy are based on truth, not lies, not disinformation. But if the information withheld has less to do with national security and more with santizing the image of the war, we are going in the wrong direction - toward extemisim, not away from it.

    I agree with concerns about safety of the military and its informants and I wish things had been handled differently in that regard. But I also wish our government would not treat us like children who "can't handle the truth". Or maybe they are afraid of just how we would handle it.

    Assange is a traitor because there are Australian troops in Afghanistan? When did not supporting a given war make you a traitor?

  • ||

    hey hux

    aldous huxley

    doors of perception

  • ||

    Last time I checked the Australians were actively involved in the Afghan war. Do you think it is possible he may have leaked something that will have an effect on their soldiers in Afghanistan.

  • ||

    ah yes those aussies are so happy happy fighting eeevil.

  • ||

    I know quite a few who do fight in Afghanistan, whether they like it or not is irrelevant. Their lives are still in jeopardy.

  • ||

    not quite

  • ||

    Is Obama president in you reallity?

  • ||

    why is personal happiness irrelevant in this specific situation?

  • typical American||

    BTW it's 2010, not 1942. Did you mean to call Assange pro-terrorist? Or did you mean to say, "if you're not for me, you're agin me", like they say in the hills. It's not a particularly sophisticated worldview there - or anywhere.

    Put it this way, dipshit: "you're either part of the solution or you're part of the problem" - or you keep your mouth shut and mind your own fucking business. See? We've given you a third option; how's that for sophistication?

  • ||

    unacceptable

    we demand unconditional surrender

  • ||

    ... molten iron?

  • ||

    in your cheap beer

  • typical American||

    I suggest you demand in one hand and shit in the other - and then see which one fills up first.

  • ||

    ya mean the one with the big psychic hammer?

  • ||

    Dipshit? Not only are you uncivilized but you have a little, narrow tiny mind.

  • ||

    thanks for the compliment as we say in the hood.

  • ||

    Wamsagongo, I was responding to typical American, not to you. We got out of sequence. I generally agree with your posts but not about your views on collateral damage.

    And while I'm in here I'll add to my response to typical American that my ancestors and relatives fought every American war from the Revolution to Korea. So this war and this country are my fucking business. These wars are waged with my money and in my name and I have every fucking right in the world to know important details.

    I have lived on American soil most of my life, I was born here and I would defend the U.S. with my life if it were invaded. But I also lived through Vietnam and have a healthy distrust of the government, its reoccurring foreign wars and its spin.

  • typical American||

    So this war and this country are my fucking business.

    Didn't say they weren't; I wasn't refering to citizens of this country, but to other countries, their leaders, and their citizens.

    But like I said - the rest of the world can be with us or against us. Or they can be neutral and stay out of it. If they open their mouths, stick their noses in, or otherwise hinder our efforts, their neutrality is going to be suspect, just like it would be regarding some feud "in the hills." You may well think that view lacks sophistication, but most issues in this world do generally boil down to simple ones. I see no reason to make life more complicated than it needs to be, and the people who do are generally con-artists of one kind or another looking for a consulting fee or its equivalent. The admonishment of small or narrow-mindedness is often merely the wail of such who cannot manage to deceive their mark with all that "nuance" and other fancy synonyms for bullshit.

  • ||

    Relationships and issues, as well as allegiances are complex and often shifting. People can agree with some of your position, but not all of it.
    Countries that are ostensibly our allies, nevertheless, spy on us. Enemies necome friends, friends become enemies. You don't have to make life complicated, it already is.

    My belief is the opposite of yours, I think it's the con artists and spinners who want to keep all questions narrowly focused so that - to them at least - there is only one right answer- their answer

    To the spinners it is not important whether people killed by the U.S, military were legitimate targets or unarmed civilians. But it is mportant to the people in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as much of the rest of the world who watches us to see if our walk matches our talk.

    In the end, it's the hears and minds
    we win that determine the outcome of these kinds of wars , military force won't do it. Terrorists can set up anywhere on the planet Our actions have a lot to do with who welcomes them.

    The strident "with us or agin us" doesn't get us the respect we need. If you want respect, you need to give respect, that is just as true for natios as it is for people. You can bully people for a while, but in the end it bites you.

  • ||

    got a little tangled in the thread oopsie

    collateral damage occurs all the time and at many levels.

    progressives are sick of the wars and we're going to stop them.

  • ||

    like your posts

  • ||

    I hope the wars do stop. At its purest and best this country is not a war machine, unfortunately we have lost our way believing that we can only be safe by ruthlessly remodeling other countries into our image.

    I hope none of the Afghans identified in the War Diaries meet the ugly ends that they very well could meet, that's who I was specifically referring to. I don't find collateral damage acceptable on any level.

  • ||

    I agree the wars need to stop. But how do we do that responsibly?

  • ||

    kmon quit jiving.

    when has THIS stupid bloody little war ever been about "responsibly"?

    your side created a war by acting irresponsibly .... those immoral actions have made you the victim that you now know yourself to be. heavy

    you want "responsible" turn out the lights go home and wait for the knock on your door.

  • ||

    As I have said we have a responsibility to the Afghan people since we essentially put them there. It is clear that you don't have any idea what you are talking about. (You may also have a reading comprehension problem.) Sadly most people in America suffer from the same problem. A whole generation has been brought to be reactionary revolutionaries. It's like all the Irish Americans who supported the IRA and the "troubles" but had never set foot in Ireland or actually had any idea what it was about. Everything they knew was through the echo chamber of their prefered media outlet. Guess what wikileaks is an echo chamber as well.

  • ||

    essentially = major bullshit

  • Tony||

    I'm sorry, but anyone claiming that the New York Times is an objective, non-activist, investigative newspaper, or allows such an opinion to go unchallenged as if factual,
    has rendered himself completely without credibility. The New York Times is as statist liberal as Fox News is neocon, with merely a few "red herring" exceptions like libertarian Judge Napolitano at Fox and some neocon columnist at NYT.
    It has made any other opinion about Assange and WikiLeaks hypocritical at best and mendacious at worst.
    Furthermore, i find it hilarious how people are using Afghans, who the American army never asked for permission before bombing their country, as a reason to attack WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks also released info about Americans shooting the crap out of people on the ground from a chopper. Is that what Afghans and Iraqi's are asking for too?
    Why don't you ask the Afghans whose weddings are bombed and children killed if they appreciate America's help against the Taliban?
    Because that would be inconvenient?
    Libertarians my ass.
    And treason? Treason to what? A country that sticks his nose in other people's business without asking first? That is responsible for more deaths during a "liberating" war than there were under the original dictator(s)? That has killed a multitude of innocent victims compared to the 3000 innocents on 9/11 that served as the original excuse for these wars?
    A country that basically armed and trained Bin Laden, helped Saddam Hussein, helped the Taliban get into power, and now "must accept as collateral damage" the deaths of hundreds thousands in getting rid of people that are there because of THEM in the first place?
    And releasing info about such a country would be "treason"?
    Treason in that sense (because it will invariably be used with every military adventure that has nothing to do with defending America's borders) is as meaningless as an accusation of treason against Oscar Schindler by some SS-officer.
    Only to one without morality, to whom the meaningless, collectivist concept of a "state" is more important than the individual people comprising it.

  • ||

    yes.

    like it or not the nytimes is the paper of record and is very influential.

    read some of the commentary on the editorials.

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.7.10 @ 1:13PM|#
    "...the nytimes [...] is very influential."

    Especially among those who think it's influential.
    Among others, not so much.

  • ||

    how many millions of people read the new york times daily?

    you get your news from usa today?

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.7.10 @ 8:36PM|#
    "how many millions of people read the new york times daily?"

    Um, far fewer than get their 'news' from Limbaugh, so I presume you think he's got it right?

  • ||

    progressives love rush limbaugh and thoroughly enjoy him for about two minutes a month.

    cheap shot warning: that was a lot of oxycontin

    i see him as a profound stand up comedian with a hint of mint in his julep.

  • wtf||

    And you are a lot of oxymoron - heavy emphasis on moron.

  • ||

    tickle tickle

  • ||

    Especially among those who are vapid windbags. Is that why the NY Time's sales have been plummeting?

  • ||

    plummeting sales have a lot to do with progressives like wikileaks providing real info and not warmed over barf.

  • ||

    Maybe we agree on more than I thought. NY Times is a mass producer of warmed overbarf. Wikileaks is not actually providing any type of meaningful journalism though. They have just posted them for the world to see. What would have been more impressive would be to write a series on the supposed attrocities and illegal activities that reportedly occuring. But they didn't do that. That would have required responsibility and a lot of work. So they just did something that would get them the most media attention. This did not contribute to society in any positive way.

  • ||

    one of the reasons that wikileaks permitted nytimes to do a report is that wl.org felt that was the best way to convey the information, very pragmatic.

    again, the most interesting aspect of all this is here we are in a somewhat altered universe.

    heh heh

  • ||

    What about...

  • ||

    no excuse me i got that wrong

    it was molten CRISCO

  • ||

    But if Assange can't or won't be tried for treason, how about if the tax, medical, work and school records plus any other squalid details about Assange, his associates, and their families were leaked to the internet?

    Maybe someone innocent might be hurt in the process, but as Assange points out, "we should actually ignore people that say something might happen or could happen." And if anything did happen, well, that would just be "collateral damage," as Assange also says.

    The public has the right to know everything about Assange and Wikileaks!

  • slowburnaz||

    Ha! Bravo!

  • ||

    What about things that WILL happen? Should those be ignored?

  • ||

    u got a ouija board?

  • ||

    What happens when an informer is discovered in the crime world? They aren't asked politely to stop. The Taliban hung a 7 year old for talking to Americans before Wikileaks. What do you think they plan to do now? You are beeing willfully ignorant.

  • ||

    what happens when your side surrenders?

  • ||

    the burning pools...

  • ||

    evocative of your home town?

  • ||

    US supports Taliban

    so what does that make George Bush?

  • ||

    grandson of prescott who was indicted for aiding the nazis

  • ||

    Not terribly revolutionary news there hoss. As for the implication that he is a traitor nice try. We weren't at war with the Taliban at the time. It shows us that we need to be more careful who we are dealing with. I am more in fafvor of Jeffersonian foreign policy but I am not sure that is practical.

  • ||

    sez who?

  • ||

    of the molten iron?

  • ||

    radio magnetic too

  • Mark S.||

    Assange might think he is a whistleblower, but he seems to have quite a low regard for accuracy and relevance. He reminds me of the scene from the movie The Fourth Protocol in which a man is caught in Britain passing secrets to a South African diplomat. When the Brit is confronted with evidence of his espionage, he states that he was doing so out of an opposition to communism and that he saw himself as a greater patriot than the men who have uncovered his activities. The men then show him evidence from the government of South Africa indicating that the particular diplomat he has been passing secrets to is suspected of being in the employ of the KGB. Everything the Brit had passed to this diplomat had been going straight to the Soviet Union.

    Similarly, Assange (and Bradley Manning) assume a level of understanding that they don't really have. The video of the Apache pilots firing on insurgents is one example of an item which when viewed without contextual information about the overall situation in which it occurs, seems damning. However, upon revelation of the complete picture, the most one could say is that pilots who voices were recorded had a morbid sense of humor - and nothing more. I suspect the same is true of the other material stolen by certain government employees and given to Wikileaks.

    Assange is much like the Brit character in the movie: A sophomoric imbecile who pretends an unrealistic level of understanding and whose actions are harmful to real men and women out there trying in good faith to carry out their legitimate duties.

  • ||

    Are you referring to the video "Collateral Murder" in which unarmed civilians, including two Reuter's employees and two children, were shot? Many died, including the father of the two children, who had stopped his van in order to render assistance to another shooting victim.

    Is this the video? Because if it is, then you are the one with the contextual issues - or maybe it is a soul that you lack. If you think that mowing down whomever happens to be in your scope using the flimsiest of justifications is acting in "good faith" then I doubt that you have one.

    Which is a much bigger character flaw than any of Julian Assange's.

  • ||

    There's 30 minutes missing from their "full" video, including that van dropping off armed men.

    And those men weren't unarmed.

    http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/201878.php

    Jawa report has done a good job exposing the amount of manipulation Wikileaks has done to the original video.

  • Ron L||

    So he's neither a journalist nor an activist. He's a propagandist.

  • ||

    so editing is only permitted by people you like?

  • ||

    What...

  • ||

    edi ting

  • ||

    The children were armed insurgents?
    The Reuter's cameramen were armed insurgents? And if being armed makes you an potential insurgent, they could probably be justified in killing most of my neighbors. But you can have guns here, just not in a war zone, even if it is your own country, even if you fear for your life (with apparent good reason).

  • ||

    Look again. They are clearly armed.

  • ||

    that was a cucumber

  • ||

    Big ass cucumber

  • ||

    they grow huge cucumbers in the mountain air.

  • ||

    The only collateral murder in that video was of the insurgents using children as human shields. The were clearly setting up to attack a US convoy. The Reuter's employees were accompanying them for some good footage of Americans getting killed and, instead, they got footage of getting killed. Seems fair to me.

  • ||

    remeber we are the occupiers of a foreign land.

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.7.10 @ 8:43PM|#
    "remeber we are the occupiers of a foreign land."

    Yeah, and purple, too. Remember purple.
    Are you drunk?

  • ||

    are you drunk on blood?

  • ||

    ABOUT....

  • ||

    time molten

  • Ron L||

    "...Assange posted 91,000 documents online having, by his own admission, read only 2,000 of them carefully..."

    I don't think the guy is either of the two. He was handed a pile of stuff, of which he admits he has limited knowledge, and he stuck it on the web.
    And went on tour...

  • ||

    incorrect

    while he may have looked at only 2000 douments, he has many functions, his volunteer staff carefully vetted all 91,000 docs.

    i believe he sat in on the sifting process after that.

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.7.10 @ 8:45PM|#
    "i believe he sat in on the sifting process after that."

    Goody for you. Got evidence?
    I believe you're an ignorant turd, and I've got evidence.

  • ||

    yes i do

    google - ted julian assange - and watch the video

  • ||

    THE BURNING....

  • ||

    cross of molten gold

  • ||

    as ringo recently said on his seventieth birthday:

    love and peace

    or was it peace and love?

  • ||

    progressives are saying that as long as the u.s. continues to kill, lie, cheat and steal, we will oppose the policies and actions in every way we can.

    and we are affective aintwe?

    jesus once said:

    know the truth and the truth shall make you free.

  • ||

    Progressives are writing those policies.

  • ||

    no

  • ||

    Have you somehow seperated yourself from reality or are from a parallel reality. President Obama is a self proclaimed Progressive. He is directing this war. These are things that cannot be denied.

  • ||

    call it parallel reality

    obama is neither socialist or progressive but i root for him anyway.

  • ||

    POOLS OF....

  • ||

    molten salty tears

  • juris imprudent||

    and we are affective aintwe?

    RC'z law frosted with unintentional self-inflicted irony. Okay, that makes up for all the noise this dumbass has injected into this thread.

  • ||

    happiness is a warm gun

  • ||

    molten iron?

  • ||

    nanothermite

  • ||

    How is that different from the microthermite? The mini thermite? Or the jumbo thermite? (I'm just kidding on that last one - I know how it is different!)

  • ||

    email physicist steven e jones and get back to me.

    thanks

  • Shoeless Chris||

    I am trying to decide if this guy is a sock puppet or if god loved him sooo much that He gave him an extra chromosome.

  • ||

    twas the aliens and their cute smiles

  • ||

    Molten?

  • ||

    molten iron is a by-product of nanothermite on steel.

  • Sidd Finch||

    "and we are affective aintwe?"

    No way this is real.

  • ||

    way

  • ||

    Iron?

  • ||

    nanothermite?

  • ||

    You don't think it's possible for someone to be that fucking stupid? Just ask yourself who is President!!!

  • ||

    lincoln's vision.

  • ||

    I think the real question is whether Assange is an enemy of the US or not. By releasing the names of Afghani who assisted us, Assange has both reduced our combat effectiveness as well as arranged for our allies to be killed. How can he not be our enemy? And, if he is our enemy, shall we deal with him in the same way as we deal with AQ?

  • ||

    he's your wrongly perceived enemy.

    that's the way it is.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Oh so his perception is wrong?

    You kill me. Keep it up I am finding this wildly entertaining.

  • ||

    YOUR perception meathead

  • ||

    M!

  • ||

    turns out that rummie was hiding in the pent broom closet with montague.

  • ||

    heh gross.

  • ||

    check out gen winfield montague's strange story on that fateful 9/11 morn.

    a few simple google inquiries and you're down the rabbit hole into wonderland.

  • ||

    trolly trolly trolly trolly... TROLTEN!!

  • ||

    I am willing to bet that Assange thinks of America as the enemy.

    Wamsagongo cannot be real. There is no way anyone can be so obtuse unless it was intentional.

  • ||

    no

    he thinks that the enemy is anyone in power who consistently lies to the people.

  • ||

    you are right good sir

    wamsagongo isn't my real name

  • ||

    O!

  • ||

    find out where gen montague was from 8:30 am to 10 am on that fateful morn.

  • ||

    Of course he is, but he can count on the "evil" US not retaliating.
    I expect others will hunt him down eventualy, and will join other martyrs like Che.

  • ||

    there's way too many of us. you need to take care bubba.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Okay, so I did a quick survey of the ground breaking proof of malicious malfeasance. What a joke, SALUTE reports, Detainee transfers (of course in the lib mind the fact that we take combatants off the battlefield is probably damning in and of itself) and Troops In Contact reporting does not constitute proof of anything other than the fact that the Army generates a lot of paperwork and reports. Still sifting through trying to find the damning evidence of war crimes.

  • ||

    what do you actually know about the lib mind other than your preconceived strawman?

  • Shoeless Chris||

    I'll tell you when you address the substance of my argument, where is the damning evidence at, or hell any of the arguments that you have thrown drum circle chant slogans at. Oh wait found this report detailing an atrocity:

    CATA Trip log for 15, July 2007

    Panjshir, Valley
    At 0800 hours CATA conducted an HA drop at the governor''s office: Please review the list below:
    1. Beans, 500 bags
    2. Blankets, 300 ea
    3. First Aid Kit, 510 kits
    4. Cooking Oil, 150 bottles
    5. Rice, 500 bags
    6. Sugar, 500 bags

    Omaris
    The village elder from Omaris stopped at the COMM site this morning for the pick of 300 gabions. Request for 1,000 bags of cement was also approved for the village.
    The village elder also received 24 wheel barrels'' from the Governor.

    Next 24 hours, recon in the Tawakh valley

    Prep for (girls) school drop in the Anaba district (300 PAX) at grid 42SWE 36600 01130

    The horror! Of course when you read the intro page to the reporting you are treated to this gem: "The field units also need to expect questions from higher up or disciplinary measures for events recorded in the messages, so they will tend to gloss over violations of rules of engagement and other problematic behavior; the reports are often detailed when discussing actions or interactions by enemy forces."

    So basically, if there is actual reporting that says "Conducted Operation Mei Lei II" you can point and shout, "butchers!" and if it does not then you can jump around and scream, "coverup!" Very convenient.

  • ||

    nervous in the servous holmes

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Still oh-fer on addressing any actual points chief. You are clearly nothing but a base provocateur, I am going to ignore you as such.

  • ||

    L!

  • ||

    would you help your bud crisco he's having a meltdown?

    not sure what your point or question was back yonder. 'scuse your humble servant ah so.

  • ||

    good sir

    if you had read the thread you will understand that imhfo the info in the files isn't that important.

    otoh

    wikileaks is

  • ||

    T!

  • ||

    Wikileaks is only as important as the data they provide. If they are releasing nothing of note then they they are irrelevant. So you believe that Wikileaks is not important

  • ||

    don't you wish

  • ||

    All I did is follow your logic. I don't think there is that much in the documents. Wikileaks didn't review them effectively and though they were far more than they were. This has come back to bite them in the ass. There isn't any evidence of rampant illegal activity but there is information that when released endangers CF in Afghanistan and Afghans themselves. So Bravo Julian Assange, you just exposed the world to the fact that you are an asshole.

  • ||

    are you more or less important than the data you provide?

  • ||

    If your entire existence is to provide information then you are only as relevant as the information you provide.

  • ||

    and what of poetry or the faces in the clouds blowing kisses?

    just askin

  • ||

    do you enjoy scratching your balls?

    is it permitted?

  • ||

    God I hope so.

  • ||

    according to the leaked man docs ball scratching is not permitted as it is a sign of humanity (and weakness) which of course is a lot like the for want of a nail horsehoe lost war fuck napolean. ya unnerstan

  • ||

    No I don't actually. I think we have sunk to a level of inannity that no ones else here should be subjected to.

  • Ron L||

    Uh, pretty sure we're getting an education about the lib "mind", and it's not pretty.

  • typical American||

    Yes, it's an oxymoron.

  • ||

    we require your unconditional surrender

  • ||

    E!

  • STEVE SMITH||

    LIKE YOUR UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE FILLING UP YOU. MANY TIMES.

  • ||

    fig newmann

  • ||

    diamond sharp hard edges

    the sweet scent of lilac

  • Ron L||

    Shoeless Chris|8.7.10 @ 8:26PM|#
    '...Still sifting through trying to find the damning evidence of war crimes.'

    Just a guess, but I'll bet the worst you find is evidence of some trigger-happy Captain who did something embarrassing. And got caught.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Yeah probably so.

  • ||

    hey no worries you're in the clear .... so far

  • ||

    but your jaxson brother might not

  • Brian Sorgatz||

    Edgar Winter? Visually, he makes me think of David Spade.

  • ||

    he looks like a very courageous man.

  • Ron L||

    To those who think the nyt is influential.

  • ||

    true the times is only influential if you actually take the time read it and perhaps make a comment in an editorial or something -- where thousands of thoughtful people read and respond.

  • ||

    N!

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.8.10 @ 3:49AM|#
    "true the times is only influential if you're an ignoramus"
    FIFY

  • ||

    my team your team

    the challenge:

    sunday noo yawk times crossword puzzle

    at dawn

    b dear

  • Ron L||

    wamsagongo|8.9.10 @ 1:44PM|#
    "my team your team
    the challenge:
    sunday noo yawk times crossword puzzle"

    Turing test fail.

  • ||

    hit the starter

  • ||

    fun

    livenin it up the jiven

    gitchie gitchie

  • Ron L||

    stupid stupid

  • ||

    that's with two d's.

  • ||

    I!

  • ||

    my first fan

    garsharooskies

  • ||

    One is responsible for the reasonable
    consequences of one's actions, in this
    case, the deaths of Afghani allies of
    the US. It is no defense that Assange
    did not know their names were in the
    documents, because he did not look.

  • ||

    they did look and carefully.

  • ||

    R!

  • Pat Bennett||

    He is a traitor and a criminal.

  • ||

    got proof

  • ||

    got iron?

  • ||

    Molten Iron

  • ||

    in your toolbag

  • Hate Potion Number Nine||

    LOL I love how you all have become pro-afghan war now that they've found millions in mineral wealth to be mined by the multi-nationals (and by afghan laborers making 10 cents a day). Way to hold on to your principles!

  • ||

    Oh Absolutely. Those of us on this thread are definitely going to get a piece of that action. I can see it now, driving along the main drag in Kabul in my Rolls Royce, bought and paid for by the sweat of Afghan backs in the mineral mines.

  • ||

    or as some inc pimp

  • ||

    All I do was talk shit and swallow spit.

  • ||

    you are over-qualified

  • ||

    moly moly moly mmmmmmmm MOLTEN!!!!

  • ||

    Rosebudd. Thats two "D"s for a a double dose of this Pimpin'

  • ||

    help your buddy crisco

    he's been eating military rations too long

  • Shoeless Chris||

    I had not heard that there was a mineral find. If so that is good for Afghanistan. What idiots like yourself fail (or refuse) to understand is that 10 cents a day, while those wages are not getting workers rich, they are providing a family with which to feed and clothe themselves. It is a vast improvement over subsistence farming.

    Although, there is good money to be made burying 122mm artillery shells on roadsides too.

  • ||

    in the sixties afghani hash was well appreciated worldwide.

    remember that progressive time before the usual colonial murderousness?

  • ||

    O!

  • ||

    not only that but he follows me around and goes woof when i say so.

  • ||

    Have some molten iron... it's full of trolly goodness!!

  • ||

    you roll it

    i'll toke it

    after u

  • .||

    LOL I love how you all have become pro-afghan war now that they've found millions in mineral wealth

    Can't speak for anyone else here, but I've been pro Afghan War from day one. I just think we should have done what we went in there to do and then gotten the hell out. We should have gotten the Taliban AND Osama bin Lunatic even if it meant crossing the border with Pakistan. And if Pakistan didn't like it, then tough shit. The US is pussy fucking around just like it did in Viet Nam and we'll probably get about the same ending...unfortunately.

  • ||

    learn anything from history?

  • ||

    N!

  • ||

    now read the rest

    good boy boff0

  • ||

    I think we should ask for Wikileaks to return all the classified material, or put a price on the head of the editor.

  • Shoeless Chris||

    See my above post... there really is not much to see here. Most of the ground breaking journalism involves puked up administrative/operations reporting. I am looking for something that would lead to the mass graves, so far no luck. Of course you can derive operational patterns and what not from all of this stuff. So, yeah this jackass showed the world (and the Taliban) how we do business.. putting the folks serving over there more in harms way.

  • ||

    your surrender will be unconditional

  • ||

    AND WHAT DOES IT SPELL!?!?!??

  • ||

    j-a-i-l

  • Shoeless Chris||

    If this bonehead would have taken the time to take a look at the data he received and put together a thoughtful, objective (objectivity is probably a bridge too far for this asshat) analysis of the information.

    If there is evidence of war crimes I am all for tracking down those responsible and holding them accountable.

    Not seeing it so far. If anyone has found said reporting. I am not even seeing the reports that give up source names either. If anyone has seen them, please point them out to me. I would like to see what kind of message traffic they are.

  • ||

    we all would.

  • ||

    Agreed

  • Shoeless Chris||

    *If this bonehead would have taken the time to take a look at the data he received and put together a thoughtful, objective (objectivity is probably a bridge too far for this asshat) analysis of the information. I might consider him a journalist.

  • ||

    you are incorrect. wikileaks did a very thorough job.

  • ||

    MOLTEN IRON!!!! YOU FUCKWIT!!!!! Now, what about it? And will you consider renaming yourself from "wamsagongo" to "molten iron"

  • ||

    yes indeed what about it.

    do your research and i will be happy to discuss.

    take care

  • ||

    Molten?

  • ||

    is that nanothermite in your coffee?

  • Shoeless Chris||

    I have done my research. I also make a living reading and analyzing traffic like this... and my conclusion is this: Mr. Assange has needlessly increased the danger to American Service members in theater whilst providing no evidence of anything that we did not already know... chiefly, that occasionally the American Military blows up the wrong people. Furthermore, he has engaged in and encouraged a campaign to tilt this information to fit his predetermined conclusion.

    wamsagongo, what is your analysis?

  • ||

    you folks keep missing the point(s).

    your perspective seems to be an inside out view - most heavily biased by the terrible and dangerous situation right now in your face and for your team.

    i look at the situation more as an unemotional outsider trying to understand what's happening.

    i have gotten interested in wikileaks only in the last month and spent time studying him/them. i came away most favorably impressed by the character - the integrity - of these people. this is what impresses me. this is what is all important to me.

    they are cutting edge technically, light years ahead of u.s. empire. ironic?

    there are thousands of communicators more over the world with the ability to speak truth to power.

    look around and wake up.

    the issue really isn't about wikileaks or our daily tragic failed war thing.

    one man's defense is another man's war crime.

    way past time to shut the war machines down and go home.

    another viet nam? so what. move on.

    git r done

  • ||

    You don't have a point is what you are saying. You also wish to be be copmpletely uninvolved with the issues that effect you anfd your world. As for cutting edge technology I think you are sadly mistaken. Prior to this large data dump wikileaks was only nominally involved in amateur hacking. Most of the information they posted came from the internet. They just then compiled and categorzed it. The Afghan War Diaries was neither. An Intel Analyst, Bradley Manning, stole it from his office. Assange found out because the kid was bragging about it. The kid then gave it to Assange. Where is this technological superiority. Read about the US Intelligence3 community. I recommend "Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy" By Mark Lowenthal. This book gives a fairly accurate look at how the intelligence community operates. Previousy I posted that Assange left Manning holding the bag. It turns out that he is willing to pay for his private council which elevates my opinion of him, if only slightly.

  • ||

    the war is lost done finished. sorry go home before it is too late for you is a point.

    open your eyes look around

    good luck

  • Ron L||

    "i have gotten interested in wikileaks only in the last month and spent time studying him/them. i came away most favorably impressed..."
    Yeah, but you're an ignorant turd.

  • ||

    wikileaks has over two million files. people do the darndest things.

    have a lovely day in the pasture.

  • ||

    Hmmm.. I wonder about those burning pools when I try to sleep at night...mmmm molten iron... yummy

  • ||

    doesn't sound like you wonder about too much beyond your daily blood infusion.

  • ||

    MOLTEN!!

  • ||

    have you seen the sat photos

  • ||

    the most important idea that you knee-jerkers need to get jerkin is that unpleasant embarrassing info on everyone and everything is available online. it's getting more organized/centralized izall.

    in this case the perception is at least as frightening as certain ugly realities.

    the good news for my team is that the fascists can't do a damn thing about it.

    buhhh gonngggggg

  • ||

    IRON!!!

  • ||

    Y!!!

  • Shoeless Chris||

    Well, guess its okay that more Soldiers and civilians are gonna die, or at least be put in more danger. As long as your team wins.

  • ||

    no no no

    we want the war to end.

    please no more bang bang go home.

    suck it up.

  • ||

    I don't see how what wikileak leaked is such big news. Anyone who had been following the war carefully could have inferred that elements in the ISI were helping the Taliban all along.

    It was an open secret. There just wasn't any publicized proof of it.

  • ||

    3 out of 4 trolls surveyed say they PREFER molten iron... in burning pools!

  • ||

    with a side of nanothermite !!??!!

  • ||

    And yet he still managed to miss the most basic piece of source protection. Don't reveal names. Assange is an incompetent idiot.

  • ||

    not at all. you're incorrectly assessing his motives.

    the col won't be happy.

  • ||

    I'm not assessing motives. I am assessing his actions. Which is far more damning.

  • ||

    who set you up as judge and jury?

    is the verdict in?

  • ||

    Yes it is. Assange will likely face charges. PVT. Mannig sure as hell will.

  • ||

    you must have assange shitting peach pits.

  • ||

    Alright, your views on Assange are well-documented. Now, where do you stand on the issue of MOLTEN IRON!??!